(November 9, 2011 at 7:44 pm)Godschild Wrote: The continental breakup came with the flood, scripture tells us that the earth split open and great amounts of water flowed forth, this is what I think happened as far as the continents being formed. This would account for the mountains which, biblically could not have existed or there would have been rain before the flood, because of the uplifting of air caused by mountains. This would explain why rain fell as it does today after the flood and why rain did not fall before the flood. Also with such destructive forces going on it would explain why the evidence for the flood no longer exist.
I do believe that the world could be 50,000 years old, we do have a dating system that is accurate to that age. Even at 50,000 years from a biblical standpoint of creation the gene pool would be pure and there would not have been enough time to completely ruin it. Actually I do believe that between the time Adam brought sin into the world and the flood were some 1700 years, this small amount of time would not have had much effect on a pure gene pool. Of course these are my beliefs and because my profession is not science I can not prove it, I do see it to be a plausible idea.
Flood? What flood? I'm a geologist, and I have never seen ANY evidence of a global flood, anywhere on this planet. End of story. Where did the water come from? Where did it go? What geologic is evidence is there that one occurred? How is the notion of a sudden global flood reconciled with the laws of thermodynamics?
We have direct methods of dating that go back substantially further than 50,000 years. But I guess you can't have that so you ignore them, right?
'The difference between a Miracle and a Fact is exactly the difference between a mermaid and seal. It could not be expressed better.'
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
-- Samuel "Mark Twain" Clemens
"I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the scriptures, but with experiments, demonstrations, and observations".
- Galileo Galilei (1564-1642)
"In short, Meyer has shown that his first disastrous book was not a fluke: he is capable of going into any field in which he has no training or research experience and botching it just as badly as he did molecular biology. As I've written before, if you are a complete amateur and don't understand a subject, don't demonstrate the Dunning-Kruger effect by writing a book about it and proving your ignorance to everyone else! "
- Dr. Donald Prothero
